As the Indian judiciary deals with mounting caseloads and calls for greater transparency, artificial intelligence can emerge as a valued ally.
The Supreme Court Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud’s term has been marked by a wave of reforms on the technological front. On October 6, the Supreme Court urged high courts to guarantee that no member of the bar is denied access to video conferencing or hybrid-facility hearings. Earlier, during hearings for the Article 370 case, the CJI had urged counsels to submit their arguments and supporting materials online.
During the Covid lockdown, the Indian judiciary embraced virtual hearings, online dispute resolutions and remote collaboration. The live streaming of court proceedings contributed to transparency and bolstered public trust. With the help of technology, the Madras High Court recorded impressive case clearance rates (CCR) of 93.07 per cent and 98.12 per cent in 2020 and 2021, as against the 76.75 per cent and 83.70 per cent recorded by all other high courts in those years. Tamil Nadu’s trial courts posted CCRs of 85.02 per cent and 95.18 per cent in 2020 and 2021, as against 62.60 per cent and 81.12 per cent by all other district courts in the country.
Tech adoption in the Indian judiciary can improve case management, predictive analytics and legal research. The modernisation drive started with the E-court project under the National e-Governance Plan, which aimed to computerise court processes and establish a networked infrastructure. The National Judicial Data Grid today provides real-time information on pending and disposed cases.
AI has the potential to enhance the efficiency of the system. It can automate case prioritisation, categorisation, scheduling and docket management, which would help analyse large volumes of documents, translate proceedings, make recommendations based on records, predict outcomes and provide data-driven recommendations.
AI is already used in the Indian judiciary. The Supreme Court has launched an AI-powered portal, SUPACE (Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court’s Efficiency) to assist judges in case management and decision-making. SUVAS (Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software), a machine-assisted translation tool trained by AI, has been developed with support from the IT ministry. This tool can translate English-language documents, orders and judgements into ten vernacular languages.
At the Madras High Court, Justice M Sundar has been appointed head of the computer committee responsible for overseeing e-initiatives. The high court has translated the largest number of Supreme Court judgements from English to Tamil, totalling 6,234 records to date; the achievement surpasses that of all other high courts. The Madras High Court has also implemented an officers’ management system, recruitment software, a display board service, e-filing, and an Advocate Information & Management System (AIMS). Chief Justice S V Gangapurwala showed his interest in such technology interventions at an event at the court’s Madurai bench, where he said, “The use of paperless courts is intended to be a significant step forward in increasing judicial efficiency and openness.”
Various countries are using AI interventions in their judiciaries. The US has employed AI-powered tools such as COMPAS (Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Solutions) for data collection, risk assessment and decision support. The US system has also developed chatbots that provide information to the public. The UK justice ministry launched a Digital Case System in 2020, harnessing AI in the judiciary. China’s use of AI in Xiao Zhi 3.0, its smart court system, claims to have reduced a judge’s average workload by over a third.
But to what extent can AI be used in our justice delivery system? Can it replace humans in judicial decision-making? There are concerns over this. Stakeholders must proceed with caution, as the use of AI in the judiciary is a double-edged sword. For instance, US judges widely use algorithms to make decisions on granting bail and sentencing. An investigation claimed that the system generated “false positives” for black people and “false negatives” for whites.
Although AI can be helpful in courtrooms, it is important to consider potential biases in decision-making due to biased metadata or false information. The justice system needs technology to manage itself. But it is important to remember that there are people behind the numbers. The Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, an independent think-tank, published a research paper highlighting that the integration of AI in the justice system requires a comprehensive legal, regulatory and ethical framework to establish trust in these technologies. Careful implementation with transparency, fairness and accountability is crucial. It is also important to train judges, advocates and other public servants to prevent AI-related harms. Tawfik Jelassi, assistant director general for communications at UNESCO, emphasises the need for new laws and immediate action on this.
Justice delayed is justice denied. For instance, the Naz Foundation case related to Section 377 took 624 days to receive a judgement. Research suggests that there is a correlation between judicial pendency and economic growth. According to a 2018 report by the Institute for Economics and Peace, the inability of the Indian state to deliver timely justice and ensure the rule of law resulted in preventable violence which cost India as much as 9 percent of our annual GDP.
PRS Legislative Research says India is grappling with formidable challenges in pendency and judicial vacancies, with over 4.32 crore pending cases and a notable shortage of judges. High courts and subordinate courts face a significant deficit, with 30 percent and 22 percent fewer judges than their sanctioned strengths. Given this, AI is a promising factor in fast-tracking justice delivery. Its integration into the legal system is a significant step in the right direction.
Hasan Mohammed Jinnah, Tamil Nadu state public prosecutor
hasanmohammedjinnah@gmail.com